I have explained this before but the question continues to be raised — why is David Miscavige so obsessed with purchasing real estate? I am answering here as succinctly as possible.
This strategy is not just the “ideal org” program, it also includes buying former homes and offices of L. Ron Hubbard, purchasing a redundant TV studio (KCET), and superfluous audio recording studio (Mad Hatter), buying properties to house printing presses and a “dissemination center” and other properties for Narconon, Applied Scholastics and the Way to Happiness Fdn.
This real estate strategy serves several purposes:
1. To keep the IRS at bay. Exempt organizations cannot accumulate too much cash. Scientology doesn’t want to “give away” money on “charity” (food and housing for poor or natural disaster victims). Buying buildings to “serve the parishioners” is considered a valid expense by the IRS and they are virtually powerless to second guess whether a property is a “valid need” as that would entangle them in First Amendment violations.
2. It is a way to convince the world (and more specifically the scientology public) that scientology is “expanding” — “look at all our new churches” [no new “churches” in fact, just new buildings] and “we have added one million square feet of [useless, unused] delivery facilities to meet the overwhelming demand for scientology.”
3. It is a fundraising bonanza — Miscavige has convinced everyone that when “all orgs are ideal” he will “release OT IX and X” which is something that will never happen. In fact, as time has gone on, the short-term memories of scientologists take over and nobody even talks about OT IX and X these days. The “target” has become getting all orgs into big, lavish buildings in violation of very specific Hubbard policy.
4. Because of the way his stat is counted, property is just as good as cash. His stat is total “Reserves” which actually means “assets,” so buying buildings does not cause his stat to go down it simply shifts from cash to tangible asset. In fact, as property values increase, his stat goes up. While scientology shrinks, and its reputation is on a par with satanism as the least respected/most despised “religion” — Miscavige is “upstat.”
From Miscavige’s perspective, this is absolute genius. And he has convinced the scientology sheeple that his brilliance is leading them to the promised land, as scientology circles the drain.
Oi vey.
I have wondered about the buildings that Scientology owns. Alot of them are massive and beautiful but, they get sold to a cult. I keep thinking if what if someone else or another organization bought them. It would do alot more good then Scientology. Because from what I have seen/heard when Scientology owns them they just get rundown and they don’t get used. It’s sad honestly. I guess we all know where COS tax money is going. It’s probably going to other things to but this could just be one of the main things.
My uneducated guess is minutes after the Dwarfenfuehrer drops his meat body the IRS will commence action. Until then they are too scared to be facing decades in court. Opinions ?
Having been at British boarding school from the age of 12 to 16, I learnt to recognise the adulation that the others gave to the bully/narcissist, holding them in high regard which I simply couldn’t understand myself. This attitude has held me in good stead ever since, allowing me to avoid getting caught up in any kind of con like this. I have had close calls but as soon as something looks a bit odd it’s time to ask questions which never get satisfactory answers.
So…Scn is scamming the IRS in addition to their customers and staff. If this isn’t RICO, I don’t know what is!
HELLO IRS! Anyone home?
Here’s an excerpt from a blog post on the mind of Ronald Hubbard that addresses this topic.
Here’s a description of a YouTube video describing the malignant narcissist as viewed by Sam Vaknin.
First I want to reference and recommend the YouTube video
Unmasking Narcissists , Psychopaths and their Abuse with Ruth Jacobs in Cambridge, UK
I consider this an excellent interview of Sam Vaknin.
He reveals how he started his research and very basic concepts that are a great foundation for understanding certain models of narcissistic personality disorder. The model he proposes is in my opinion comprehensive and regarding Ron Hubbard is also extremely detailed and consistent with all of the doctrine Hubbard created and his behaviors, emotions and beliefs. Particularly if you accept Vaknin’s concept that antisocial personality disorder AND narcissistic personality disorder can both be present in one person.
In the malignant narcissism model as the two disorders combined Hubbard is explained to an astonishingly accurate degree (Dr. Daniel Shaw has the subgroup traumatic narcissists which include cult leaders and zeroes in on Hubbard even further, and the effects his actions create even more.)
Vaknin here explains many details of narcissism and malignant narcissism. He explains the theory of severe abuse or neglect or idealization as causing narcissism. In theory either way the child is caused trauma so routinely and severely they do not develop boundaries and an individual identity in a normal or healthy progression. Parents with borderline disorder or other severe disorders more often raise narcissists.The child to cope makes a false self to hide behind and the true self atrophies. The true self diminishes so much it lacks key developmental experiences and progress that others have.The false self is a facade, a fake perfect, confident, invincible, all knowing superior being – but it is entirely a lie.
The narcissist has such extreme inability to face the true unhappy, self loathing self that they do not face it and through honest self reflection grow.
Vaknin describes NPD as having a fractured mind. Similar but not identical to MPD. He includes the concept of the narcissist as one who changes their attachment style to avoid abandonment by lacking strong emotional bonds of trust and love and compassion as they are avoiding the deep pain of abandonment by a person they have deeply bonded with.
He explains how narcissists create the fake self in response to unbearable and extreme long term trauma and that the damage that creates narcissism is devastating. The change is longstanding and on the level of the foundation of the identity of a person. This has striking similarities to certain ideas and statements Ron Hubbard made. Several statements he made reflect the exact attitudes and feelings Hubbard expressed. Hubbard’s redefinitions of affinity strongly fit the behaviors defined here.
Hubbard’s pathological lying fits this perfectly. His relentless lying AND the content of his lies that aggrandize his achievements and abilities fits this model with chilling and profound consistency. His description of the idolized or golden child as treated as perfect, superior and flawless as one who responds by knowing they are truly not recognized or even perceived leads to a no win situation. If they try to adopt the true identity they cannot become this as no one is perfect. If they utterly reject the fake perfection they are discouraged and in conflict with only neglect and no proper recognition and encouragement. They adopt the fake identity as a lie to survive. In utter confusion and desperation, they hold two belief systems – the false hopes and optimism of the fake identity and the severely negative, lonely, despondent, low self-esteem, conflicted and essentially double bound undeveloped true identity. It is often so desperate and traumatized and lacking in a positive self image that no lie, no act is beneath its nonexistent dignity.
The narcissist to survive relentlessly seeks attention, rewards and “proof” of being successful, intelligent, able and noble – the very attributes the narcissist lacks and avoids the true situation regarding compulsively or obsessively by trying to “prove” they have perfectly.The narcissist has the obstacles of immense buried cognitive dissonance regarding their desires and self image prior to developing narcissism and the confusion over their trauma and adopting false beliefs to quell dissonance and by adopting them avoiding by denial and dissociation the dissonance and so find rejecting the narcissistic traits that result as unthinkable. And the lack of development of normal traits such as humility and compassion, including empathy, leaves the narcissist severely unprepared to easily correct their severe and chronic flaws that constitute a bona fide personality disorder.
It is chilling and tragic to recognize the tremendous similarities between how Vaknin’s concepts precisely outline the process of the development and conditions of malignant narcissism and the progressive gradual changes a Scientologist experiences.
Hubbard developed a method of covert abuse that through his cult mirrors his own development into a traumatic narcissist. The Scientologist gains two belief systems – similar to the two selves Hubbard had. The cult member develops a very extreme double think and pathological avoidance of reality – similar to the narcissist Hubbard hiding behind and focusing on the false self and striving to make its lies true.
The cult member develops the hidden profoundly overwhelming potent cognitive dissonance hidden from the conscious mind via trance logic achieved by deep, strong hypnotic submission to Hubbard – as Hubbard developed it as a dysfunctional coping mechanism for his idolized golden childhood. He did not understand the treatment he received and buried the truth of his inadequacy and inability to be perfect and transcend his very humanity. He hid from the contradiction between the identity he truly had and the one he was falsely attributed with in childhood. He has been reported to have been coddled and spoiled to an extreme degree by several relatives as a child.This is not love and affection and encouragement. It is being treated as a projection of the desires or fantasies or emotions of the caregiver and in truth extreme – almost absolute emotional neglect – as the child is not even seen or loved in this relationship and can sense the caregiver’s love of a fantasy and lack of true acceptance. The contradiction between the fake adulation and true neglect and totalistic control create a double bind – the loving hand is truly one enslaving and denying the existence of the child (Hubbard) and his rights.That this is covert is the source of the contradiction, confusion and double bind.
Hubbard never overcame this and fitting Dr Daniel Shaw’s traumatic narcissist model Hubbard perpetuated this by covertly subjugating his victims – he did not recognize their rights or even status as deserving honesty, dignity, happiness, freedom, families, sanity or even life itself. As he was not recognized as a person he also did not see others as truly people and saw this as not just justified but as sensible, logical and emotionally rewarding to him.
This is also progressively attained as one adopts Scientology more fully. A denial of others’ rights is encouraged quite strongly with repetition and variation throughout basic and all Scientology doctrine. Repetition and variation are two primary methods of influence long used in hypnotism, rhetoric, indoctrination and conditioning. Virtually every school of persuasion recognizes these as valid and fundamental methods – and effective as well.
This chillingly can be seen as mirroring the idealization Hubbard is reported to have experienced as a child – he surely was told in ways that were repeated over and over of his superiority and told with varying statements and behaviors that agreed with and strengthened this lie – that became his desperately chased but never attained satisfactorily delusion. He simultaneously tried to hold it for comfort and relief and KNEW it was entirely false.
I was trying to think of the best possible visual reference to show the outer facade of a perfect godlike fake identity and the true inner atrophied, abandoned, worthless, utterly abominable, pathological liar, morally corrupt, entirely lacking in both humility and compassion, inner true self and was thinking of a beautiful castle and on the inside a dark corner in wreckage behind the facade is a broken, hiding, confused, desperate, insane, wounded child.
I realized Scientology actually manifests this literally physically now. The ideal org program is exactly a perfect representation of this.
Beautiful facades that lie empty and lifeless with a few desperate deluded slaves trying to will the magical thinking in Scientology into reality.
From
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/05/scientolgys-parallel-in-nature_3.html
Appreciated. As a long term Sea Orger, 75 to 03, reflecting today how I fell for the Hubbard world and comparing my limited understanding of the world back then, and continuing now, as an aging adult, continuing to slowly educate which happens in spurts; thanks.
I followed down the link and watched some of the YouTube content of Vaknin’s speaking here and there.
Prof Kent years back settled on Hubbard being a malignant narcissist, and due to my ongoing ignorance, relying on faith, I plugged Kent’s words into how quickly best label Hubbard.
I’m more sub par average layman though, so “cult leader” and then Hubbard erecting all the cult bureaucracy echelons around Scientology to me, since I was thick in the cult bureaucracy in my decades in Sea Org, I responded to Robert Jay Lifton’s criteria for a totalistic cult framework, befitting what Hubbard wrought and which is the today’s still standing cult structure of official Scientology.
So for sure, Scientology, is deeply messed up.
Finally, as an aging ex (75 to 03 were my intense years in Sea Org), finally, I relish the Judge who said Hubbard was a pathological lier and this pattern has been stamped into the Hubbard organizations today.
Thus, conclusion, what I like, is:
a) malignant narcissist
b) totalism cult bureaucracy founder
c) pathelogical lier
And then, one more, to me, final outsider simpler, for the average citizens, is Arthur C. Clarke’s
“…..I’m afraid he went crazy and made a lot of other people [become] crazy….” (I paraphrase this Clarke comment on Hubbard)
“Cult” is the average public’s instant rejection word, which I feel is legit to be used, since I feel like a very burned, ripped off, average dupe, since I dropped out of University to join and waste 27 years in Sea Org for Hubbard’s cult bureaucracy machine that falsely claims to be making supernaturally improved people here on earth, but it of course is NOT doing this, and it’s just a ripoff cult.
Chuck Beatty
ex 75 to 03
Well, you certainly have covered a lot of bases here.
I know that you have been reading The Underground Bunker by Tony Ortega for many years, like myself.
One of the most helpful resources for me has been The Scientology Mythbusting Series by Jon Atack and his other articles online.
They helped me to realize that I had to study hypnosis and the techniques of contradiction (aka paradox or confusion), mimicry, vivid imagery, repetition, repetition-with-variation, attention fixation and so on.
Obviously the book, Let’s Sell These People A Piece of Blue Sky is the best available reference on Scientology in my opinion.
The point of why studying these is so important in my opinion is that one has to somehow accept that Scientology founder Ronald Hubbard both knew that he was using covert hypnosis to try to mentally enslave his followers AND he was to some degree apparently a believer in the usefulness of hypnosis as he used the affirmations as self hypnosis commands for years, probably decades.
It’s an odd combination to know you are hiding hypnotic techniques and lying constantly about using it on others BUT also to use them quite frequently on yourself and further to have others audit you with these techniques.
He may have actually been trying to “solve” his own mental conditions and problems with Scientology techniques while knowing that he lies and fools others and that his techniques are enslaving the minds of people.
Further, he in my opinion was conflicted about the occult and supernatural as he was concerned about God in his most private communications, such as the affirmations and his private letters, such as The Skipper Letter.
His persistent belief in Diana, aka Artemis, aka The Redhead was a significant factor in his life. He hid occultism as he understood it throughout Dianetics and Scientology. Occult words and numbers and symbols are present throughout Dianetics and Scientology.
Jon Atack has several excellent articles on Hubbard and the occult.
Regarding God, Hubbard denied God several times in Scientology but in his affirmations clearly tried to convince himself that he had a good relationship with and accepted God.
In The Skipper Letter he portrays God as uncaring and kind of cruel.
In an old tape I recall Hubbard saying that the closest he (Hubbard) came to quitting Scientology was admitting that God himself couldn’t do the job that Hubbard has done!
Quite humble!
My personal interpretation of this is that Hubbard believed in God and he felt mistreated and unappreciated by God.
I think that he wanted to be on the good side of God, if such a thing exists. He also wanted to have the fantasy that he was immune to God and free from any rules or punishment or judgement from God.
I think he wanted to possibly magically escape the wrath of God and he to some degree settled for hypnotizing himself into believing he was fine with God.
You have mentioned the excellent work of Robert Jay Lifton. I think it’s possible his eight criteria for thought reform is the tool that may have helped the most people to reframe and recover from cultic experiences via education.
It just has resonated with thousands of people, possibly millions, and made sense of the way that cults operate. I recommend several models of cults including The BITE MODEL, Margaret Singer’s model, the work of Daniel Shaw, Alexandra Stein, Janja Lalich as examples, but if you only look at one model I think the eight criteria for thought reform is the one to start with.
You may be familiar with this already.
I want to add that the model of a solipsistic reality that Lifton presents in his very short and easy to read book, Losing Reality adds context to the mind of Hubbard.
I think that we are fortunate in a way because the subject of cults and cult leaders is evolving during our lifetime. We get to take in information about the subject that is decades old and consider it and add new information as it comes out.
For ex members who were in Scientology or another cult this is an opportunity to take their experience and sort of take in the various models and ideas on cults and see what is most useful for their own recovery and education and also what they see as most consistent or accurate.
Perhaps the old “crazy or conman” question regarding the guru (cult leader) is the hardest to answer, because most people assume a cult leader is either a fraud OR a true believer in what they are preaching or selling.
With Hubbard and several other cult leaders there’s ample evidence that they both lie, know that they are lying, cover up their lies and crimes AND to some degree enjoy believing that their claims and desires are superior to or can control reality itself, but if they have to choose between protecting themselves and continuing to assert their beliefs, they will usually be practical and act as if their asserted beliefs are not really true.
As a case in point, Hubbard claimed that Scientology gave himself and others abilities such as telepathy, exteriorization, precognition, telekinesis and on and on routinely but in his own organization he used conventional espionage for Snow White and numerous other operations.
He hid the failures of Scientology and constantly blamed them on others and he lied about the results from Scientology. He reportedly turned down the efforts of outsiders to confirm his claims of improved reflexes and memory from Scientology. They were willing to do this work for free but Hubbard was unwilling to cooperate. Hubbard was also unwilling to demonstrate his own improvement in himself when asked.
Several articles at The Underground Bunker document this.
I hope these two points about the mind of Hubbard being two sided and his conflicts with God add something useful to the picture.
Yes, I predate Tony’s growth into being sort of the replacement forum for discussion that used to be A.R.S and Clambake, F.A.C.Tnet, and then ESMB came along after I came out even.
I was also a walk in, so this hypnosis angle, the repetitive asking of the commands in Hubbard’s processes, mostly in the “lower grades” and not in the 1-9,A-D of the R3R commands of the 1968 upgrade of Dianetics, I was trained in my first couple years as an auditor in R3R so Jon’s claim didn’t stick:
You said above:
“,,,,,,The point of why studying these is so important in my opinion is that one has to somehow accept that Scientology founder Ronald Hubbard both knew that he was using covert hypnosis to try to mentally enslave his followers AND he was to some degree apparently a believer in the usefulness of hypnosis as he used the affirmations as self hypnosis commands for years, probably decades……”
This point also didn’t earn my agreement due to “Chinese School” being a tradition that it is, going also back even further to Buddhism being itself transmitted by recitation, and repetitious recitation to learn it word for word by memory.
Further, the pre Buddhist Brahmanism of India also their Brahmans learned themselves their Veda scriptures by memory, again, reciting their content by memory, for centuries.
All of this repetitive study of any material, there’s just the basic argument that this is a method of remembering some information, and transmitting it.
Another reason I never bought this hypnosis generalization is from sitting “in session” on the Grades (lower level quackery commands of Hubbard’s) themselves.
I ran almost ALL of the processes on Grade 0, and if you know the Grades, then if you lay out ALL of the processes, you see that Grade 0 has the greatest number of Hubbard “processes” (sets of commands to repetitively ask of the recipient of the Hubbard pseudo-therapy quackery).
I never completed the redoing I was put on, of Grade 0, I never “attested” and wasn’t thought to have attained the EP, and I agree, I did not attain the EPs of Grade 0 (there are four flows of EPs, if you are familiar with the four EPs of Grade 0).
And I did NOT feel personally, having thoroughly, and I know NONE of my then peers ran as many processes of Hubbard’s for Grade 0, as thoroughly as anyone I’ve ever spoken to who has done Grade 0, only exception is the Ron’s Org Switzerland persons one or another has said they run ALL of the Grade 0 processes, and don’t do as official Scientology does which is “check for read” every “Flow” of the processes, first before skipping or running EACH flow command. This Ron’s Org member mentioned they now just RUN THEM ALL.
Running all of a Grade’s “grade processes” and running all flows, is in my opinion, it was not for me, hypnotic.
That is a deep issue. I”ll sit down with anyone willing to get into the details of the running of the Hubbard quackery, on this.
I’ve heard of people and read their comments, that running a process of the Grades in general, became hypnotic.
I do believe them.
I also know that ANY of the Class 4, Class 6, Class 8 or higher auditor of the era I was trained would NEVER allow their recipient receiving that process was going into hypnotic trance in answer to the processes.
That is clearly something you don’t do as an auditor, is let the preclear go into hypnotic trance, even a light one, as is the general criticism.
I do agree that some people will go into more of a hypnotic bad state with the poorer auditors who don’t recognize their recipients of the quackery going into hypnotic state.
All of human education, indoctrination, I believe, can be characterized as mental conditioning into a structure of mental views, and then the repeating of the key mental walls of that whole mental view, is hypnotic in that sense, of just slipping into that mindset, into that mental framework.
I recognize that, I was a course supervisor, and to explain a key “Code of a Course Supervisor” list that are drawn up and issued as Hubbard’s list of KEY rules for a course supervisor, one key key key one, one I took as my utmost important, is the point about having the skill and duty to find the clarifying Hubbard nugget reference point from the WHOLE body of Hubbard’s writings, and get that nugget reference to the student to clarify the student’s query. Slacker, more horribly bad course supervisors would just rotely tell the students to “Find your misunderstood” or send the student to the “Word Clearer” for mandatory word clearing. But the highest skill I felt which I dedicatedly subscribed to, and which lead me into my later jobs as a mediocre researcher and reader of ALL of the private paperpusher final writings by Hubbard which I later was highly interested in reading for this same reason, to just be able to know and have in my mind, ALL of Hubbard’s views on all things, and be able to then also HELP any executive of Scientology to then SEE those other Hubbard writings, to clarify or rectify their forever ongoing resolving the troubles that come up with the running of this Hubbard cult empire bureaucracy.
I was truly wastefully intimately interested in ALL aspects of anything Hubbard wrote, including into his pulp fiction, which I read with this same view above, of the “Course Supervisor” code key point of being able to know and direct students or executives to the various OTHER snippet and nuggets of Hubbard’s writings.
So, hypnotic argument falls deaf on my ears, not my problem.
I was more in the line of thinking the way the lower Grades repetitive processing commands are run on persons getting the Hubbard quackery, can be hypnotic, but that is due to genuinely other issues at play. Meaning it is in the mental health wiser minds who recognize some persons are more susceptible to hypnosis than others, and then the whole indoctrination educational practices of endless groups in society who use repetitive indoctrination methods to instill the key mental structures and training so that trainees or recipients become second nature at that groups’ methods.
My most productive youthful years were wasted (1976-1983) at Flag Clearwater, as a course supervisor. I was born 1952. If there is still to this day some major lingering harmful indoctrination, in me, it’s the above. I took the Course Supervisor’s Code seriously like nothing ever in my life, and especially on the point of finding the right reference for the student or executive, to clarify some point of Hubbard’s to resolve some issue.
I am a mediocre to sub par Course Sup, but on this one point, I’m personally “in the game” when it comes to discussing Hubbard’s paperpushing cult bureaucracy, at the highest level participant.
I’ll email you back on the rest of the points, but I think we’ve between the two of us, gone back and forth for years. But to me, since I was chatting big issues, and learning on A.R.S starting in summer of 2004 when I unbridled myself and began learning the ropes in the then 2004 era chat sites critics, which I learned and wrote long answers even back then, like this.
Chuck Beatty
ex Flag Course Sup, 1977 to 1983 (one year off as word clearer in the 81-82 slot)
critic since summer of 2004 on the chat sites.
PS: Tony didn’t get rewarmed up until several of us pleaded with him to please take up scientology more, around 2005-6 and that was due to the Patty Moher parties of the east coast SP critics parties she held.
I have long run into ex Scientologists and Independent Scientologists who insist that either Scientology is not hypnotic or that they avoided hypnotizing people somehow. Some have claimed their intention to not hypnotize made it so that techniques that hypnotize people routinely didn’t do that when they applied them because of…reasons…
I have frankly found the same thing to be true every time. I would ask them about methods of hypnotic induction and other basic questions on the subject and they have had no answers at all. The sad reality is that every single ex Scientologist or ex cult member or cult expert that I have encountered that actually studied hypnosis to any significant degree all have agreed that the techniques in Dianetics and Scientology are hypnotic. One hundred percent.
I remember in the first couple of years after I left Scientology going into online groups that were for students of hypnosis and they adamantly agreed that Dianetics and Scientology are obviously chock full of hypnosis and that the most raw of new students to the subject could see this as the very most basic concepts and phenomena of hypnosis are present and front and center.
They used numerous terms regarding hypnotic techniques and language patterns and in my opinion a lot of these are various ways to describe or attempt the basic techniques and they vary in how one tries to get the result. The example of repetition and repetition-with-variation as two methods that are based on the same idea (repetition) shows two similar but different methods.
Many of the hypnotic language patterns have various names and they encourage the use of different techniques but often come down to variation of the same technique (confusion.)
I had to read quite a bit and watch numerous short videos on the particular techniques to understand them.
The gradual process of finding statements on the subject then deciphering the details of exactly what steps are taken is not short or easy. One might have to devote a hundred hours or so to studying hypnosis to begin to have enough education to examine Dianetics and Scientology and form an educated opinion on the presence or lack thereof of hypnosis in these subjects.
Plainly, you have to understand hypnosis far more than an uneducated layman to be able to even look for it.
The “education” one gets regarding hypnosis in Dianetics and Scientology is inconsistent, contradictory, and in my opinion a combination of truths, half truths, and flat out lies.
Hubbard said many things that are denied by Hubbard and this is spread all throughout Dianetics and Scientology and since nothing is ever cancelled in Scientology doctrine the Scientology student is left utterly confused by his inconsistent and often irreconcilable statements regarding hypnosis.
(Some things ARE cancelled in Scientology, but they are not old ideas that Hubbard claimed as his own, they are ideas that are described as coming from other people, in other words Hubbard himself didn’t classify ideas he put out as being his creations as outdated)
Jon Atack in his article Never Believe A Hypnotist made the case quite thoroughly and in my opinion convincingly.
I wrote my own article quoting his article and using the words of Hubbard himself to support his points.
I will put my article at the end of this.
I have written many, many other posts using specific quotes from Hubbard to demonstrate that he described Dianetics and Scientology as being based on hypnosis and hypnotic in nature.
Additionally, I have seen hypnotic techniques taken verbatim from books on hypnosis and used in Scientology and Arnie Lerma has documented this at his blog and Steve Hassan has studied hypnosis and made his own statement that this is his observation as well.
Arnie Lerma went through the trouble of finding old books on hypnosis and copying the pages next to pages that have Scientology auditing techniques and the commands are identical in several cases.
I think the unavoidable reality is that the evidence that Dianetics and Scientology are hypnotic in nature is overwhelming.
I think that auditors being careful to not use hypnosis is, well, not plausible. I mean they can be careful, but I think that they are unlikely to prevent hypnotic techniques from being hypnotic and that they frankly don’t understand hypnosis, certainly not if they relied on Scientology doctrine exclusively to explain it.
Auditors were given such contradictory information on hypnosis and so much was lies that I think that they are far more confused on the subject than educated.
I do not believe “intention is cause” as Hubbard claimed. I think that hypnosis is a process with components and steps. When you “process” someone as Hubbard described you have the auditor follow steps to change a person and the person gets changed by these steps which are hypnotic, if the process is successful.
Hubbard noted that hypnosis had this wild variable. It worked sometimes and it didn’t work at other times. It worked on some people but not on others. A technique might work on a fellow one day but not another. A technique might work on a person for so many hours then not, another might work for hundreds of hours on a subject.
This makes it so that some people, like myself, entered hypnotic trances while undergoing auditing or the use of other Scientology techniques such as study tech, for example.
Some people didn’t ever get hypnotized.
Every school of hypnosis that I have seen agrees on the idea that some people are easy to hypnotize, some people are harder to hypnotize and some people apparently are impossible to hypnotize.
Laymen often believe myths about intelligence, sanity, strength of will, or other factors deciding who is capable of being hypnotized. I think that those ideas are flat out wrong.
I think that the truth is we don’t know what is the reason that people are easy, hard, or impossible to hypnotize and we might never know.
I think that for anyone trying to understand cults and Scientology in particular a significant degree of education regarding hypnosis is absolutely essential.
You may agree or disagree with me regarding Scientology being hypnotic but I think that if you don’t take the time to examine hypnosis at length for yourself you can’t understand what you are even saying regarding the subject.
Ex Scientologists have the experiences they had and usually a vast amount of Scientology experiences to draw upon but in my opinion education on undue influence, what people routinely call brainwashing, and hypnosis and the true history of Scientology and Hubbard is necessary to be able to form an educated opinion on Scientology, no matter how long one was in or how much Scientology one practiced.
Here’s a link to my blog archive by topic:
Blog Archive by Topic
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2020/07/blog-archive-by-topic.html?m=1
Here are several posts that are referred to in this post or that elaborate on the points raised here.
A Psychiatric View With Comments On The Admissions…
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/04/a-psychiatric-view-with-comments-on.html
Basic Introduction to Hypnosis in Scientology
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/basic-introduction-to-hypnosis-in.html
Burning Down Hell – How Commands Are Hidden , Vari…
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/02/mockingbirds-nest-burning-down-hell.html
The Critical Factor
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-critical-factor.html
Scientology Assists and Objectives as Hypnosis
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/02/scientology-assists-and-objectives-as.html
Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 1: Hypnosis …
mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/scientology-ron-hubbard-and-hypnosis.html
Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 2: Hubbard’s…
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/scientology-ron-hubbard-and-hypnosis-2.html
Scientology, Ron Hubbard and Hypnosis 3 – Hubbard’…
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/scientology-ron-hubbard-and-hypnosis-3.html
Insidious Enslavement : Study Technology
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2015/01/insidious-enslavement-study-technology.html
Scientology Was Ron Hubbard’s Private Game
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2016/12/scientology-was-ron-hubbards-private.html
Jon Atack – Scientology Expert
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/jon-atack-scientology-expert.html
Scientology as Described by Experts – Jon Atack
“Never believe a hypnotist”
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/jon-atack-scientology-expert.html
TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2019
Scientology as Described by Experts – Jon Atack
Scientology has been described as based on hypnosis by many Scientology experts. Now, this is not a statement that these people are infallible authorities or that their consensus or near consensus on Scientology and hypnosis is beyond questioning or absolute proof. I hope that people take these statements as reason to consider that they might be correct and it is worth serious examination of the evidence for a claim when you have a consensus or near consensus by a variety of experts on a topic. They are not automatically right but the claim they make is worth looking at.
I am going to start with the person I consider the top living Scientology expert – Jon Atack. Jon Atack has studied influence for around thirty years and written several books on influence and one on Scientology and numerous articles as well.
I am going to quote his article Never Believe A Hypnotist. This article is available in full online.
“Hubbard was ambiguous about suggestion: “We never give positive suggestions” (R&D1, p.48); but “you are putting in positive suggestion whether you want to or not, no matter how careful you are” (R&D1, p.336).”
“As well as showing genuine insight into hypnosis, Hubbard’s statements are a fascinating maze of contradiction and misdirection. It soon becomes apparent that Hubbard is both eager to show off his knowledge and determined to hide something vital: that Dianetics is a form of hypnosis.
Prolonged and deliberate study of Hubbard’s teachings makes it impossible to escape the conclusion that Dianetics is a form of hypnosis, differing only from that subject in the words used to describe the procedures. Hubbard’s own Policy Letter “Propaganda by Redefinition of Words” (PR series 12) gives some understanding of the sigificance of redefinition (something Hubbard was frequently prone to, “reasonable” and “postulate”, for instance). ”
“The current Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course seeks to re-establish Dianetic “auditing” as it was performed at its inception in 1950 (see The Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course or The Hubbard Dianetics Seminar).”
“In his second article, Hubbard admitted “I knew hypnotism was, more or less, a fundamental” (EoS, p.22) and said that “hypnosis was examined” (ibid, p.23; see also EoS, p.96; R&D1, p.183). Hubbard also claimed to have used “hypno-analysis” (EoS, p.24) – psychoanalysis practised on a hypnotised subject – and recommended a book on the subject (Hypnotism Comes of Age, R&D2, p.12).”
“Hypnotism “reduces self-determinism by interposing the commands of another below the analytical level of an individual’s mind … It is the sort of control mechanism in which an authoritarian individual, cult, or ideology delight. People who indulge in hypnotism may, only very occasionally, be interested in experimentation upon the human mind … Genuine experimental hypnotism, strictly in the laboratory and never in the parlour, and done wholly in the knowledge that one is reducing the efficiency of the human being on whom one is experimenting and may do him permanent damage, and the use of hypnotism by a surgeon … should end the extension of hypnotism into the society. Submission to being hypnotized is analagous to being raped, with the exception that the individual can, generally, recover from being raped. To any clear-thinking human who believes in the value of people as human beings, there is something gruesomely obscene about hypnotism. The interjection of unseen controls below the level of consciousness cannot benefit but can only pervert the mind … The individual who would permit himself to be hypnotized is, frankly, a fool … It was thought by hypnotists that the mere remembering of … suggestions would relieve them, and that the power of the suggestion died out with time. These two ideas do not happen to be true” (SOSII, p.220f; see also pp.225f). ”
“Hypnosis defined:
According to Hubbard, hypnosis is a relatively simple mechanism, “By deep trance or drugs we take a patient into amnesia trance, a state of being wherein the ‘I’ is not in control but the operator is the ‘I’ (and that’s all there is, really, to the function of hypnosis: the transfer of analytical power through the law of affinity from subject to operator, a thing which had a racial development and survival value in animals which ran in packs).” (DMSMH, p.94).”
“Hubbard gave various descriptions of hypnotism, for example: “Hypnotism is the entering of the hypnotist’s personality and desires below the choice level of the individual.” (SOSI, p.16); and “Hypnotism is the art of implanting positive suggestions in the engram bank.” (DMSMH, p.384). By the time Science of Survival was published, in June 1951, Hubbard asserted that “Hypnotism never has and never will raise an individual on the [emotional] tone scale” (SOSI, p.161).”
“Positive suggestion:
Hubbard made various assertions about suggestion: “positive suggestion means in hypnosis a suggestion which is given to a hypnotized subject which will result in some change in the manifestations and actions of that patient” (R&D 1, p.48); “It is a suggestion by the operator to a hypnotized subject with the sole end of creating a changed mental condition in the subject by implantation of the suggestion alone. It is a transplantation of something in the hypnotist’s mind into the patient’s mind. The patient is then to believe it and take it as part of himself.” (R&D 1, p.237; see also R&D 1, p.33); “Shut down the person’s analyzer [the ‘analytical mind’ of dianetic hypnosis] and what follows goes in as positive suggestion just as though he were hypnotized. He cannot reason on this data, he can only react, and he reacts as dictated by the engram.” (R&D 3, p.244). Hypnotic suggestion is very powerful: “No matter how foolish a suggestion is given to a subject under hypnosis, he will carry it out one way or another … Any suggestion will operate within his mind unbeknownst to his higher levels of awareness. Very complex suggestions can be given” (DMSMH, p.56). Hubbard went on to say that neuroses, psychoses, compulsions and repressions can all be perfectly imitated through positive suggestion.”
“According to Hubbard, trance states are common, and can even be induced through the normal procedures of education: “In altitude teaching, somebody is a ‘great authority.’ He is probably teaching some subject that is far more complex than it should be. He has become defensive down through the years, and this is a sort of protective coating that he puts up, along with the idea that the subject will always be a little better known by him than by anybody else and that there are things to know in this subject which he really wouldn’t let anybody else in on. This is altitude instruction.” As an aside, it is worth mentioning that Hubbard was later to assert that every major tenet in Scientology and Dianetics was his exclusive discovery (see HCOPL “Keeping Scientology Working”, February 1965). Hubbard continued, “And in order to get people to sit very alertly and do exactly what he says, he has another trick: he gives them examinations … So there is this anxiety around a person’s grades, and this comes forward until he finally gets up to a point in education where when somebody says the word examination to him it not only push-buttons him but it also threatens Mama, Papa, love and general survival. It is a terrific whip. It keeps people in a state of confusion, and when their minds are slightly confused they are in a hypnotic trance. Any time anybody gets enough altitude he can be called a hypnotic operator, and what he says will act as hypnotic suggestion. Hypnotism is a difference in levels of altitude. There are ways to create and lower the altitude of the subject, but if the operator can heighten his own altitude with regard to the subject the same way, he doesn’t have to put the subject to sleep. What he says will still react as hypnotic suggestion.” (R&D 4, p.324; see also R&D 3, pp. 246 & 248). This is a point which should be considered long and hard by anyone who has been involved with Dianetics or Scientology. ”
“Trance in Dianetics:
Hubbard was also aware of the signs of trance: “a pre-clear after he closes his eyes will begin to flutter his eyelids. This a symptom of the very lightest level of hypnotic trance.” (SOS II, p.227); “A simple test is to watch the person’s eyeballs. You will find as he lies there that the eyeballs under the closed eyelids will hunt back and forth. You can see the bump of them on the eyelids, and they will be wandering … the hunting indicates a hypnotic state.” (R&D 1, p.336); “The eye moving underneath the eyelid is the indication of when a person is lightly or deeply tranced. That is the second stage of which the fluttering eyelid is the first.” (R&D 3, p.94); “The preclear’s eyes will roll a little bit under the lids and when he returns, particularly, the eyelashes will flutter, which tells you immediately that he has become more suggestible than he ordinarily would be.” (ibid); “Sometimes you will notice a tremble on the eyelids. This means the preclear has deepened his sense of sleep and has left some of his attention units somewhere. This is a very early stage of hypnosis. Be careful of such a patient.” (R&D 4, p.38).The current use of the Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course and the Hubbard Dianetics Seminar is in total contradiction to these admonitions. By returning to the 1950 method, Scientology has returned to direct trance induction. Both of these courses give: “When the preclear’s eyes close and you notice his eyelids flicker, finish counting…” (p.54 and p.42 respectively, step two).
These are not the only signs: “If the person begins to answer you literally … that means your preclear is now a hypnotic subject and you are running him in hypnosis.” (R&D 3, p.94; see also R&D 1, p.336). These prohibitions form no part of any auditor training course known to this author.”
“Use of hypnotism in auditing:
The auditor “must be prepared to use hypnotism, he must know how it works, what he should do to make it function, how to regress a person in hypnotism and so on, which is definitely very different from Dianetics in that one produces a trance.” (R&D 1, p.307).”
“After Dianetics: MSMH was published, Hubbard withdrew the system of counting the preclear into reverie: “Sometimes people go into a hypnotic trance by accident with this count system … so at the Foundation we no longer use it.” (R&D 3, p.15; see also R&D 4, p.37; DMSMH, p.201). Unfortunately, this advice is ignored in the current Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, auditing reverts entirely to Dianetics: MSMH, so by Hubbard’s own statement, the Church of Scientology is using a hypnotic induction as standard procedure (“Count slowly and soothingly from 1 to 7”, just prior to the flickering of the eyelids already mentioned. Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, p.54, Hubbard Dianetics Seminar, p.42, step two). Hubbard was perfectly aware that counting out loud is a method of hypnotic induction (DMSMH, p.123).”
“Having said that fluttering of the eyelids is indicative of trance (see above), Hubbard gave the following instructions for inducing reverie: “The patient is made to lie down and shut his eyes. The operator begins to count. He suggests the patient relax. At length the patient’s eyelids will flutter (Medicine drumming will also accomplish this without producing a harmful amnesia hypnotic state.) He is permitted to relax further. Then the operator tells him that his ‘motor strip’ (his sensory perceptions [sic]) is returning to a time of unconsciousness … With coaxing the patient will begin to feel the injury and sense himself in the location and time of the accident.” (R&D 1, p.8). This statment, which comes from Hubbard’s first published article on Dianetics, shows an interesting choice of words – the auditor is called the “operator”, he “suggests” that the preclear relax into a state which is not a “harmful amnesia hypnotic state” (which does not rule out light trance, or even “harmless” amnesia), and the engram is found through “coaxing”.”
“In lectures given in 1950, Hubbard recommended three books on hypnotism to his followers: “Anyone in doubt as to how hypnotism works need only consult the authoritative books on the subject by Estabrooks [George Hoben Estabrooks, Hypnotism]. In fact, this is recommended as a means of proving that Dianetics and hypnotism are total strangers.” (R&D 4, p.345); “There is a little book by a man by the name of Young written about 1899, which contains in it about as much hypnosis as one ever wants. It is called Twenty-Five Lessons in Hypnosis … Practically everything in that book works, and clairvoyance, mesmerism and so forth are also delineated” (R&D 1, p.307); the third, and most significant, work recommended is Wolfe and Rosenthal’s Hypnotism Comes of Age(R&D2, p.12).”
“Despite protestations that hypnotism and Dianetics are “total strangers”, Hubbard several times advocated the use of hypnotism alongside Dianetics: “it is even allowable to use actual hypnosis if it is possible to procure any results from it. So hypnosis has some value, but it has value only to a professional auditor … If he can spill emotion in deep trance or even in narcosynthesis, he has achieved a gain on the case. This is for a very special tough type of case” (R&D 1, p.182). Hypnosis and Dianetics are not the only approaches “Faith healing, when not practiced on the hypnotic level of ‘This is not going to hurt you any more’, has ingredients that you can use.” (R&D 1, p.186).
Auditors do need to be aware of hypnotism: “it is quite usual for the auditor to have to exhaust hypnotically implanted material received either from some hypnotist or from the analytical mind itself when the person has been operating under auto-control [sic].” (DOT, p.69). Also, “It is pertinent to diagnosis whether or not the preclear is highly suggestible or can be hypnotized” (SOS II, p.220). Further, “understanding the mechanism of post-hypnotic suggestion can aid an understanding of aberration.” (DMSMH, p.56); “The next thing an auditor should know well is the effect of hypnotism and drugs, and he should have observed this actually.” (R&D 1, p.307). The auditor should be aware of hypnotism, because, as already cited, “hypnotism is very common in this society” (R&D 1, p.24).”
“Unfortunately, auditors share an ignorance of hypnotism with the general populace and simply parrot Hubbard’s calming assurance that “auditing is not a form of hypnosis” or that “auditing removes hypnosis”. Despite their implanted obsession with the meaning of words, Scientologists are largely unable to define the “hypnosis” which auditing supposedly removes. They believe it to be drowsiness or lack of awareness, rather than the heightened state known to hypnotic subjects and touched upon by Hubbard in Dianetics: MSMH: “By suggestion the power of hearing can be tuned down or up so that a person is nearly deaf or can hear pins fall at a great distance”. Most usually, hypnotic trance is a state of heightened awareness which excludes certain perceptions. It is a highly focussed state, often accompanied by a sensation that “the colours in the room are brighter”, as well as spatial dissociation (called “exteriorization” by Scientologists and “depersonalization” by psychiatrists).”
“Suggestion:
Hubbard was ambiguous about suggestion: “We never give positive suggestions” (R&D1, p.48); but “you are putting in positive suggestion whether you want to or not, no matter how careful you are” (R&D1, p.336).”
“Hubbard added “A motto one could use is ‘Never believe a hypnotist'” (SOS II, p.228). ”
References:NB: page numbers vary in later editions, and some material may have been censored from these editions.
Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950.
Atack, Jon – A Piece of Blue Sky, Lyle Stuart books, 1990.
Freud, Sigmund – the Clarke Lectures in Two Short Accounts of Psycho-Analysis, Penguin books.
Hubbard, L.Ronald, Dianetics – the Modern Science of Mental Health, Hermitage House, 1950; later editions until the 1985 Bridge edition have identical page numbering.
– Dianetics the Evolution of a Science, 1950; AOSH DK Publications, Denmark, 1972.
– Dianetics the Original Thesis, 1951; Scientology Publications Organization, Denmark, 1970.
– Hubbard Dianetics Auditor Course, Bridge, L.A., 1988
– Hubbard Dianetics Seminar, Bridge, L.A., 1988
– Research and Discovery Series:
volume 1, lectures June 1950; Bridge, 1980.
volume 2, lectures July – August 1950; Bridge, 1982.
volume 3, lectures 10 August-8 September, 1950; Bridge, 1982.
volume 4, lectures 23 September-15 November 1950; Bridge, 1982 .
– Science of Survival, 1951; Hubbard College of Scientology, 1967.
– The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, 1979.
Miller, Russell – Bare-Faced Messiah, Henry Holt, NY or 1987.
Wolfe, Bernard and Rosenthal, Raymond – Hypnotism Comes of Age, Blue Ribbon Books, NY, 1949.
Young, L.E. – 25 Lessons in Hypnotism, Padell Book Co, NY, 1944.
abbreviations used in the text:
AstSF – Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950
DMSMH – Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
DTOT – Dianetics the Original Thesis
EoS – Dianetics the Evolution of a Science
R&D – Research and Discovery, followed by volume number
SOS – Science of Survival, followed by volume I or II
Hi one more answer to Mockingbird,
On God, I differ. I was an atheist going into, and coming out of Scientology, and I never put God into Hubbard’s own mental problems.
Since I’m studying Buddhism, the Middle Length Discourses audio book (on my 4th time through it), I pre Scientology when I was an atheist had Buddhism on my short list to learn about, when I foolishly jumped into Scientology for my big choice.
Buddhism’s concept of God, well, is you listen to the Middle Length Discourses, the audio 38 hours worth, pretty much gives their view.
Hubbard, his Scientology, when I was getting into it, I never ever saw Hubbard mention God and his religious upbringing as something Hubbard was mentally battling with or framing.
Instead, going into my “Course Supervisor” Code point “The Supervisor must never neglect an opportunity to direct a student to the actual source of Scientology data.” and Code point: “The Supervisor should be able to answer any questions concerning Scientology by directing the student to the actual source of the data. If a Supervisor cannot answer a particular question, he should always say so, and the Supervisor should always find the answer to the question from the source and tell the student where the answer is to be found.” what I’d argue against the idea Hubbard had some of his own God problems, while it’s possible, if you list out what Hubbard said on God, I think that’s a better fuller Hubbard actual view:
a) “One Was Stubborn” 1940 pulp story, the “God” bits of the story particularly align with Hubbard’s decade later Scientology views on God. (“As-is” Hubbard concept in the “old” red hardbacked Scientology dictionary).
b) Hubbard’s “Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought” chapter “The Parts of Man” where Hubbard claims the optimum state of a person (we as a thetan or soul) is exterior to our human body
c) Hubbard’s “Death Event” where Pat Broeker I think gives accurately LRH’s views on operating exterior to the body in the future, as steps in higher soul/thetan spiritual advancement.
Just anyone reading through Hubbard’s own books, you see he was never caught up in Christianity thinking or God issues.
And this is NOT something persons from a Buddhist background if they are Pali Canon studiers of Buddhism are also not caught up in.
So that God problems of Hubbard, I don’t think he had frankly enough God Christian education enough to have felt any big fear of a super God.
Final important reference which I’ve countless times referred to on the God question, and to academics to please read, is the Time Track Bulletin Number 1.
The section about Home Universe, and Hubbard upfront says he does not think there is some big thetan, namely God God, lurking out there.
Hubbard believes the big picture to be as he states it in Time Track Bulletin 1, something anyone wishing to really get Hubbard’s God views in Hubbard’s view.
But Hubbard was messed up, he was dodging from his mental illness all his life, to the bitter end, so that I agree was there, and it’s the greatest problem in all of the Hubbard empire. Like the judge noted, and like Clarke noted, Hubbard’s mind has now been transferred to his followers. That makes biggest sense to me.
I read and took Hubbard’s big views about it all, pretty detailedly seriously. Not now.
Myself, since in my life, Buddhism was my alternative choice to studying Scientology back when I foolishly chose Scientology in 1975, today I’m now studying Buddhism Pali Canon “The Middle Length Discourses” audio book, etc.
The stat of the seaborg reserves was defined by hubbard as the thermometer of scn’s performance. Even in his hallucinatory vision of things, this could make some sense since, in the end, all actions were supposed to somehow result in that stat.
Unless you look for a shortcut and start doing stat pushes with 40 years of fundraising on a large scale. This Just kills anything
You could have easily titled this post, “Why the Expensive Mormon Buildings?”
As I have described in my post “Archaeology and the Book of Mormon,” the building of massive edifices for the LDS Church could be aptly described as follows:
“The Gilbert LDS Temple, located at “Discovery Park” in Gilbert, Arizona, is part of a broader trend within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to construct temples across the globe. With temples planned or already present in 39 states and over 70 countries spanning six continents, some observers perceive these grand structures as an attempt to compensate for the perceived lack of substantive “proof of legitimacy” for the religion below ground. The Gilbert Temple, despite its grandeur, has disrupted the natural beauty of Discovery Park, which was established in 2006, a full eight years prior to the temple’s dedication. For many, the temple’s imposing presence almost seems like an affront to the surrounding landscape.”
A former member of the LDS Church, Paul A. Douglas, offers an interesting observation, “But in the case of high-demand religious organizations of the corporate ilk (Mormonism and Scientology being the two best examples), the stated goal may be to save souls, change hearts and minds and encourage good works, etc., but the real purpose in the organizational, bureaucratic sense is to recruit and maintain members (followers) so as to acquire their time, their talents and their fortunes.
The point is however, that these institutions often care little about what matters to their constituencies – what they value or see as most meaningful is what fulfills them, and helps maintain their viability.”
THUS … massive buildings and edifices that “maintain their viability.”
https://bit.ly/3KzTSLw